Advanced search

Volume 9 1948~1951

Doc No.
Date
Subject

No. 111 NAI TSCH/3/S14333A

Memorandum for Government by the Department of External Affairs 'Ireland's position regarding proposed Commonwealth conference'

Dublin, 18 August 1948

  1. From various indications it is more than likely that the question of Ireland's attendance at the meeting of Commonwealth Representatives, tentatively fixed for the month of October in London will be raised in the immediate future. It is expected that this question may be raised by Mr. Noel-Baker next week-end when in Dublin. It is also quite possible that the British may arrange to have the matter raised with the Taoiseach by Mr. MacKenzie King in the course of the Taoiseach's forthcoming visit to Canada.
  2. In these circumstances the Minister for External Affairs considers it advisable to have a decision from the Government as to the attitude to be adopted in the event of the matter of our invitation and attendance being raised.
  3. It is not clear yet that all the Commonwealth countries will attend. Nor is it clear that they will all be represented by their Prime Ministers. Newspaper reports would indicate that some of the Commonwealth countries have been reluctant to signify their willingness to attend. If Australia attends it is announced that she will be represented by Dr. Evatt, Minister for External Affairs, and not by the Prime Minister. It has also been suggested in newspaper reports that some Commonwealth countries will only be represented by their High Commissioners.
  4. There has been no official information as to the Agenda or the nature of the matters to be discussed. The only indication which might be termed official is that contained in a communication of the 12th August from the British Representative to the Taoiseach enclosing a message from the British Prime Minister concerning the precedence which should be given in Britain to High Commissioners. It may be that this communication was intended as an indication of one of the matters which it is proposed to discuss. On the other hand, it is somewhat noteworthy that neither the letter from the British Prime Minister, nor the covering note from the British Representative makes any reference to any meeting of Commonwealth representatives. On the contrary it merely asks for the views of the Taoiseach.

    It is possible that this letter and message, which was sent as well to Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, India, Pakistan and Ceylon, may have been sent to anticipate possible criticism concerning the continued use of the term 'High Commissioner', by seeking to remedy in advance the anomalous position concerning their diplomatic status. The British Premier's message does not propose any alteration in the title, but merely proposes that they should be given a certain status in the British table of precedence.

  5. While there is no official indication as to the matters to be discussed, an examination of the position would lead to the assumption that the following matters would be amongst those discussed:-
    • Defence and military co-operation. It is known that the British Government is desirous of a closer degree of co-ordination in military and naval matters and are anxious that some of the Commonwealth countries should bear a portion of the cost of the British navy and air force.
    • The setting up of machinery for closer consultation between London and the Commonwealth countries.
    • The alteration of the King's title. The Canadians are known to be anxious to change the King's title from 'King George VI of Great Britain, Ireland and the British Dominions beyond the seas, King Defender of the Faith', to 'King George VI of Great Britain, Ireland, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, India, Pakistan and Ceylon'.
    • E.R.P. Some of the Commonwealth countries, notably, Australia, have expressed dissatisfaction with the concept of E.R.P.
    • Migration from Britain to Commonwealth countries.
    • Britain's policy in the South-East Pacific.
    • The continuance of the term 'High Commissioner'.
  6. From the foregoing, it will be readily appreciated that we will have little interest in many of the matters under discussion and that, indeed, some of these matters might raise questions of considerable difficulty from our point of view.
  7. Since 1932, no Irish representative has attended any meeting of Commonwealth Ministers, though some have been held. In view of the fact that we are not members of the Commonwealth, should our representation at this meeting be contemplated, it would be necessary to make it clear, by an agreed exchange of correspondence in advance, that we were attending, not as members of the Commonwealth, but because of our desire to co-operate in matters of mutual interest.
  8. If it were decided to attend, the following three matters are matters that might well and should be raised there:-
    • Partition. The meeting would be the appropriate place at which to raise, formally and definitely, the question of Partition.
    • The elimination of Ireland from the King's title. This is a matter which has been raised informally before, but such a conference seems to be the appropriate place at which to raise it formally.
    • The abolition of the title of High Commissioner and the substitution therefor of ordinary diplomatic titles.
  9. Having given the matter full consideration on the balance of advantages and drawbacks, the Minister for External Affairs recommends to the Government that Ireland should not be represented at the meeting of the Commonwealth representatives.
<<< Previous Document Next Document >>>